__DATING METHODS- NO C-14 IN COAL-C-14 dating is generally accurate to within 150 years, or up to 250 years.-Most results are rendered invalid by absorption, leaching, cosmic radiation, and a proven varied rate of decay.-Balloon soundings show that much more C-14 is still being formed than is decaying. This could be so only if the process had BEGUN RECENTLY. Dr. Cook calculates an age for our atmosphere of no more than 10,000 years.[Nobel Prize medalist Melvin Cook determined that carbon 14 was still building up, which could only happen if the process had begun recently. He calculates that the discrepancy between formation and decay indicates an age for our atmosphere of no more than 10,000 years. The likelihood that carbon 14 was produced at a rate up to three times greater in the past, would reduce this figure to a mere 6000 to 7000 years. {Cook, M.A. “Do Radiological Clocks need Repair”, Creation Research Society Quarterly, vol. 5, October 1968, p.70}https://pmredmond.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/from-adam-and-eve-to-the-present-aug-2120121.pdf- See also The Killing of Paradise Planet by Jonathan Gray at https://www.scribd.com/document/114899907/The-Killing-of-Paradise-Planet- and SURPRISE WITNESS: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED DURING THE FLOOD by Jonathan Gray athttps://www.scribd.com/document/114899464/Surprise-Witness ]-REASON FOR DISCREPANCIES: A PAST COSMIC DISASTER-Plants and animals did not absorb any radiocarbon 14 before the Disaster, Because the band of moisture filtered the rays out before they ever reached the nitrogen in the earth’s atmosphere. That’s why scientists found no C14 in the coal.=========================Postby Lloyd » Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:16 pm__DATING METHODS- Dating Methods Inaccurate http://beforeus.com- Henry Faul admits: MOST of the ages obtained by the lead/thorium method DISAGREE with the ages of the same minerals computed by other lead methods (Henry Faul, Nuclear Geology). Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different. A skeleton from California was estimated at 70,000 years old (by partic acid racemization) (World Archaeology, vol.7, 1975, p.160). In 1981 this age was revised to 8,300 to 9,000 years (by uranium dating) (Science, vol.213, 28 August, 1981, p.1003). In 1983 samples of the same skeleton were dated at 3,500 to 5,000 years (by radiocarbon dating) (Science, vol.220, 17 June, 1983, p.1271).- In eight separate tests, scientists dated samples of rock – and arrived at ages of 160 million to 3 billion years. These specimens, from Kaupelehu, Hualalai Volcano, Hawaii, were later found to have formed in a lava flow only 168 years earlier, in 1801. (Science, vol.162, p.265. Journal of Geophysical Research, vol.73, p.4601. American Journal of Science, vol.262, p.154).- Muscle tissue from beneath the scalp of a mummified musk ox in Fairbanks Creek, Alaska, was dated at 24,000 years; hair from a hind limb of the same animal was dated at 7,200 years.- [Ice cores] In 1942, during World War II, some war planes landed in Greenland. In 1990, they were found covered by 263 feet of ice in 48 years! 263 feet divided by 48 years is ice growth of about 5.5 feet per year. Divide 10,000 feet by 5.5 and it's 1,824 years for ALL of the ice to build up.Note: those planes did not sink into the ice, due to pressure on the ice. The ice had grown OVER them. (http://www.thelostsquadron.com). Cardin saw Many hundreds of layers of ice… dark – light – dark – light, above the airplane. That’s not summer and winter. It’s warm – cold – warm – cold. You can get ten of those in one day. Yet, the scientific elite was still calling them annual rings in 1998 (Scientific American, February 1998, p.82).- Radioactive “Dating” FailureRecent New Zealand Lava Flows Yield “Ages” of Millions of Yearshttps://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/radioactive-dating-failure/- Radiometric Dating: Epic Failurehttp://rkbentley.blogspot.com/2014/11/radiometric-dating-epic-failure.htmlMt. St. Helen's erupted in 1980. As far as volcanoes go, it was a rather tame eruption but it was one of the larger ones to happen in this generation. Because of its size and occurrence in our lifetimes, it's been the subject of much scientific inquiry. Dr. Steven Austin, a creationist and PhD geologist, collected rock samples formed in the eruption and had them tested using the potassium/argon dating method. The results on different samples gave ages between .35 (+/- .05) and 2.8 (+/- .6) million years. The known age of the rocks was 10 years old.- More on Faulty Dating Methods (from 1st post)https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/radiometric-dating-problems-with-the-assumptions/http://creationtoday.org/radiometric-dating-is-it-accurate/http://cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating2.htmlhttp://www.icr.org/creation-radiometric/_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Postby webolife» Wed Nov 04, 2015 3:29 pm__RADIOMETRIC DATINGthere are millions of fossils found in museums all over the world ... why is it that the vast majority of those fossils are identifiable by currently existing groups of animals [and plants, etc.]? There are more variations within families of organism existing today than there are transitional features found in [supposedly billions of years of] the fossil record! So without this missing data, the fossil record becomes one of not change, but of mass destruction/extinction of creatures in the past. ... I realized that the extant evidence actually points to catastrophic events predominating the geologic history of the earth. I started by questioning the presumptions of radiometric dating, not the least of which is that without knowing the initial conditions of the parent elements, the ratio of daughter elements is inconclusive at best. ... if one assumes that the initial state of naturally occurring uranium were that of 50/50 mixture with lead [isotopes do not help this dilemma], as is observed throughout the earth and solar system, then a natural conclusion would be that the earth was very recently formed. ...=========================Postby Lloyd » Sat Dec 26, 2015 12:43 am__C14 DATINGQuestion on C14 Dating for WebbGordon, THE EXTINCTION OF THE MAMMOTH at http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Mammoth_01052014.pdf which Nick discussed, says on pp. 214-5"However, the strongest evidence from radiocarbon testing to support man being in the New World also came [from] Pedra Furada. Charcoal from the deepest fireplace in the strata gave dates of 3,700 ± 830 years and 32,160 ± 1,000 years. Furthermore, an entire series of radiocarbon dates consistently became older as the researchers dug deeper into the site, going from 6,160, 7,750, 7,640, 8,050, 8,450, 11,000, 17,000, 21,400, 23,500, 25,000, 25,200, 26,300, 26,400, 27,000, 29,860, 31,700 to 32,160 years B.P.555 These dates becoming older with depth were just what was later found at Meadowcroft rockshelter Pennsylvania...."555 N. Guidon, G. Delibrias, "Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32,000 years ago," Nature, Vol. 321, (1986), pp. 769-771.- I'm assuming that all of those datings are incorrect and that the sediments were all deposited about the same time probably after the Great Flood. But I also assume that the carbon-14 ratios may vary with depth. Or is that untrue? Here's another quote from the book on p. 213."As Dr. Roger Wescott told me when I spoke with him by telephone about this on April 17, 1997, radiocarbon always gives a scattered set of dates. The theorists then pick the ones that they believe to be correct."- Do you know if any objective tests have been done to see if the ratios do change with depth? Or is it more likely that the ratios are fairly random and that scientists just pick the dates they like from the "scattered set of dates" that the testing produces? If the ratios really do change with depth, then we'd need to determine why that is, but if they're actually rather random, then we'd need to find proof of this randomness. Eh?_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Postby webolife» Sat Dec 26, 2015 3:28 pm__C14 DATINGArchaeologically, C14 should logically show greater ages as you go deeper in a dig. But I have proposed that prior to the deluge the atmospheric structure prevented the mixing of C14 from the upper atmosphere where it is produced to the biosphere where it is incorporated into living systems. So the influx of C14 after the deluge would result in rapidly "decreasing" age results as you date objects further past the end of the deluge. The uniformitarian assumptions behind standard radiocarbon dating yield might a result of 30,000 BP based on the low C14 count where I would propose ~6000 or so BP.====================postby Lloyd » Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:56 pm__CATACLYSM DATING- Gordon, do you know why the Younger Dryas is conventionally dated at about 12,000 years ago? Do you think it should be dated after the Great Flood, about 4,200 years ago? If so, what is some of the best evidence for that? In some of the first posts on this thread I listed some of Jonathan Gray's reasons for dating the Flood to 4,300 some years ago. I'd like to be able to persuade Mike Fischer to change his timeline, if there's better evidence than what I've seen so far.____________________Postby webolife » Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:09 am- Timelines will always be conjectural and controversial. I'm good with standard C14 12,000BP correlating to an adjusted ~6000?BP date based on the influx of C14 into the troposphere as a result of the atmospheric collapse associated with the flood event(s). Dates associated with animals that survived the flood event might yield in the neighborhood of 50,000+BP due to the negligible amount of C14 they ingested. Subsequent generations might yield dates in exponentially decreasing years down to a relatively reliable correlation with actual dates in the ~5000BP ranges +/- 700 yr uncertainty because of equilibrium/non-equilibrium assumptions. Fossils buried deeper in the strata should show virtually no C14 because the pre-flood atmosphere was free of it. Purely conjectural here.« Last Edit: January 12, 2017, 09:36:03 am by Admin »

_2) __- 2. AGE OF THE EARTHLK: Do you think the Earth existed before the time the Bible says it was created?- Do you consider Earth to be just 6,000 or 7,000 years old, as per the popular Bible interpretation?- Or do you think the supercontinent formed before that?- How do you think the supercontinent formed on the Earth? Have you read Charles' theory?GW: I think it is possible that the earth's crust and atmosphere were the topics of Genesis 1 and 2, so there is a reasonable option that the primordial planet and other bodies were created prior to that time by immeasurable years.

_2) - FOSSIL ORDER- [An] experiment showed that the natural order of settling following death was, from the bottom up: amphibian, reptile, mammal, and finally bird.18 This order of relative buoyancy correlates closely with “the evolutionary order,” but, of course, evolution was not the cause. Other factors, also influencing burial order at each geographical location, were: liquefaction lenses; which animals were living in the same region; and each animal’s mobility before the flood overtook it._2) - FLATTENED FOSSILS BETWEEN THIN LAYERS- Many fossilized fish are flattened between extremely thin sedimentary layers. This requires squeezing the fish to the thinness of a sheet of paper without damaging the thin sedimentary layers directly above and below. How could this happen? Because dead fish usually float, something must have pressed the fish onto the seafloor. Even if tons of sediments were dumped through the water and on top of the fish, thin [flat] layers would not lie above and below the fish. Besides, it would take many thin layers, not one, to complete the burial. We do not see this happening today. However, liquefaction would sort sediments into thousands of thin layers. During each wave cycle, liquefaction lenses would simultaneously form at various depths in the sedimentary column. Fish that floated up into a water lens would soon be flattened when the lens finally drained. [Water hammers and flutter vibrated the sediments as explained below.]_2) Petrified Forest.- Probably the world’s largest concentration of petrified wood is in the Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona. (Trainloads of petrified wood were removed before the region became a protected park in 1906.) Few people realize that this park lies inside the former Hopi Lake. Why does wood petrify, and how were these unusual conditions met in Hopi Lake?_2) - Researchers using silica-rich solutions have duplicated petrification in laboratories. [In the flood] (1) ... silica ... was dissolved in the hot subterranean water and (2) ... large preflood trees58 [were] floating in warm postflood lakes....“... silica nucleation and deposition can occur directly and rapidly on exposed cellulose surfaces.” Sigleo, p. 1404._2) - “The majority of these trees [in Petrified Forest National Park] were very tall. On the average the logs are about 80 to 100 feet long and three to four feet in diameter, but some range up to 200 feet in length and ten feet in diameter at the base.” Sidney Ash, Petrified Forest: The Story Behind the Scenery (Holbrook, Arizona: Petrified Forest Museum Association, 1985), p. 20.

_2) =========================Postby Lloyd » Sun Jan 03, 2016 9:59 pmFOSSILS __ROCK FORMATION BY TSUNAMISElectrical FormationHi, Brigit. Have you read Charles' papers at http://qdl.scs-inc.us/2ndParty/Pages/6031.html? He has the best, most detailed explanations of the electrical formation and features of planets, stars and galaxies that I know of. Do you know of any better explanations than his for any cosmic or geological phenomenon?Sandstone FormationCharles' papers at the link above explain the electrical forces involved in Tides, Earthquakes, Vulcanism, and Crater Formation, which helped shape the Earth's surface. But the sedimentary rock strata were most likely formed by the Flood, not by "electric" forces primarily. Conventional geology says much of the sandstone was formed from desert sand dunes, but detailed studies show that they were formed under water, like limestone and shale. The paper, Startling evidence for Noah’s Flood: Footprints and sand ‘dunes’ in a Grand Canyon sandstone! at http://creation.com/startling-evidence-for-noahs-flood shows in detail why it is rather certain that sandstone was formed under water. Read especially the sections called "Those footprints" and "Desert ‘dunes’?" They explain that footprints in dunes do not show toe prints or distinct features, but only depressions. And the angles of dunes are different from sand waves underwater. That's partly how they could determine the sandstone formed under water.__GRAND CANYON SAND DUNESWebpage: Startling evidence for Noah’s Flood: Footprints and sand ‘dunes’ in a Grand Canyon sandstone! http://creation.com/startling-evidence-for-noahs-flood

_2) PREQUEL: CATASTROPHIC GEOLOGYUniformitarian Geology (like other establishment institutions) is a house of cards ready to fall down, just from the slightest new impact. The weak link in the chain of arguments for conventional geology is the assumption that sedimentary rock strata were deposited very gradually, each stratum requireing thousands of years to accumulate and lithify. The internet has allowed amateurs to enter serious discussions of science, making it more democratic and less authoritarian. Authoritarianism is coming to be seen as barbaric and outdated, which it is. See the Foreword below for some of the detailed non-religious reasons that strata must have been deposited under catastrophic conditions, not gradualistic ones.

_2) TWO BIG ERRORS IN GEOLOGY1. Radioactive Decay Clock.Science began to be taken over by corporate interests in the late 1800s and these interests tended to be antireligious. Religious people tended to believe that the Earth was hit with a global flood a few thousand years ago, because the Bible makes that claim, and religious geologists found abundant evidence of such a flood.- The antireligious geologists, who probably wanted to prove the Bible was wrong, were not making much headway until in the early 1900s radioactivity was discovered and along with that was found the decay rates of radioactive elements. The decay rates indicated how old some rock formations were, but the estimates were based on some important unproven assumptions, e.g. that all of the element called lead was a decay product and that the decay rates can never change under any circumstances. __I'll discuss these probably false assumptions later.__

=========================Postby Lloyd » Sat Oct 31, 2015 1:22 pm__CATACLYSM DATING- Cataclysm Occurred 4,300 Years AgoThese Geological Features Yield Ages of About 4,000 Years http://beforeus.com-INLAND LAKES: lakes of the Great Basin; Albert and Summer lakes in Oregon; Owen Lake in California; Lake Agassiz, the largest glacial lake in North America-RIVER DELTAS: The deltas of the Nile, the Volga, the Mississippi and Bear River on the Alaska-British Columbia border-WATERFALLS: Niagara Falls, Horseshoe Falls, Upper Great Gorge, Niagara River bed-CORAL REEFS: Great Barrier Reef in Queensland, Australia, Pandora Reef-TREES: Sequoia; New Zealand’s Coromandel Peninsula, giant kauri; Bristlecone pine-OLDEST DESERT: Sahara Desert{In 1999, the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research, in Germany said the Sahara Desert is only about 4,000 years old (originating around 2000 BC) (July 15, 1999. Geophysical Research Letters).}-OTHER NATURAL FEATURES: Magnetic reversals, varves, coal, canyons, dense jungles, rock strata, fossils and so on (http://www.beforeus.com/shopcart_ebooks.html).mada-DATING OF CHINA-DATING OF ROYAL GENEALOGIES [of several European Nations]- EGYPT: Egypt’s monuments themselves do not begin their records before the 19th dynasty. The Byzantine chronicler Constantinus Manasses wrote that the State of Egypt had already lasted 1663 years, [since] 2188 BC. Egypt was anciently known as the land of Khem (i.e. Ham [son of Noah]). Menes and Hermes were two of Ham’s sons. HERMES (CUSH) WAS FOUNDER OF EGYPT’S RELIGION. Chaldean was a diplomatic language in Egypt. “Her”, in Chaldee, is “Ham”, or “Khem”, “the burnt one”. The Egyptian god HOR-us (the sun) is “Her” (“the hot or burning one”). Her-mes means the son of Her (Ham).- DATING OF ATLANTIS: An ancient history book, the Oera Linda Boek, dating primarily from AD 803, but added to for 500 years, bears this postscript: “written in Liuwert (Ljuwert) in the 3,499th year after Atland (Atlantis) sank, or 1256, the year of the Christian reckoning.” This historian placed the sinking of Atlantis in 2244 BC (Alec Maclellan, The Lost World of Agharti. 1982, p. 186).- WHAT THE TOLTECS REMEMBERED ABOUT HISTORY: In the sixteenth century, the native Mexican chronicler, Ixtilxochitl in his Relaciones penned a history based on all available pre-Conquest records and legends. ... The Flood came “after the world had existed for 1,716 years” (Francis Hitching, World Atlas of Mysteries. 1978, p.165). This is only a 60 year variation from the figure given in the King James Bible. (Genesis chapter 5)- FLOOD DATE ALSO DEFINED: The Flood ended in 2344 BC. The Great Pyramid independently confirms this date (Stewart, The Mystery of the Great Pyramid, pp 17-19). The star group Aquarius is featured in the astronomy of the Pyramid. Ancient peoples associated AQUARIUS with the waters of the GREAT FLOOD. The pyramid measurements incorporate the length of the new, post-Flood 365¼ day year, and NOT the pre-Flood 360 day year.-The ancient Chinese, Babylonian, Roman, Mayan, Indian and Egyptian calendars were 360 days long. But later, every nation changed its calendar.- DATE OF THE FLOOD - ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE RECORD: We start from a known date in history, the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar in 586 BC. [Make that 399 BC per Dating2 file.] add the years of the kings of Judah after Solomon which totalled 345. 586 + 345 = 931 BC. Solomon reigned for 40 years, his first year was 970 BC. In the fourth year of Solomon’s reign he began to build the house of the Lord (1 Kings 6:1) = 967 BC, the 480th year from the Exodus. 967 + 480 = 1446. From Abraham’s call to sacrifice Isaac until the Exodus was 430 years. The portion of this sojourning spent in Egypt was only 260 years, from 1706 to 1446 BC. The beginning and ending dates of the Great Flood was around 2345 to 2344 BC. 2345 = 1446 + 970 + 931 + 586.

====================postby Lloyd » Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:19 am__CATACLYSM DATING- Dating the Main Cataclysm- Grey Cloud, since you've said you're interested in Bronze Age cataclysms, would you like to comment on the following material from a catastrophism conference? I suppose it occurred in the 1990s, but that's just a guess. I got this free from the same site I mentioned last time. If you copy 2 or 3 words toward the beginning or end of a paragraph from a prior search, you can often find more from the same source. It took me about 6 such searches to get the following. This intrigued me because it sounds very much like what Mike Fischer's Shock Dynamics theory of continental drift says, at least regarding the huge impact site, just north of Madagascar. Fischer is saying this occurred nearly 12,000 years ago, but this paper said 4,300 years ago, which is what I and Gordon conclude. If Gordon's reading this, I hope you may comment too.<AGREES ON MAD. IMPACT SITE>- I'm also including in green type another of the conference topics on how cataclysms led to religions etc.- http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/search.cgi?zoom_query=- The Cambridge Conference [SIS C&C Workshop]- [The conference covered] three papers dealing with the historical evidence for catastrophes. Steven Robinson ... suggested that fossil evidence actually indicates rapid events and that the vast geological time scale depends upon radiometric dating which is probably suspect in its assumptions. World wide accounts of a catastrophic flood, if considered as actual historical accounts, could explain much of the geological evidence. A catastrophic model of causation suggests a massive impact north of Madagascar. Accounts in the Bible would seem to indicate this and ancient maps confirm that continental movements have taken place within historical times. Considering the evidence of the ice-ages, climatic change and the evidence for violent earthquake activity in the Early Bronze Age, Steven concluded that the early Cambrian period should be considered to be only thousands, not millions, of years ago, at the time of the Flood, the Cretaceous/Tertiary event marked the division of continents and that the end of the ice-ages occurred around 2,300 BC, caused by an increased tilt of the Earth.- John Bimson considered the biblical evidence for catastrophes. Velikovsky's scenario had been founded on the idea of the Exodus taking place at the time of a great catastrophe in the middle of the second millennium BC. Did biblical traditions support this? The implication of the astronomical use of megalithic monuments would indicate that these were built after any major Earth shifting catastrophe and radiocarbon dating led to the conclusion that any such catastrophe took place at the end of the Egyptian Old Kingdom, in line with Mandelkehr's 2,300 BC event. The destructions in the Middle Bronze Age were not so widespread as those of the Early period and could have been caused by man. All the events of the Exodus could be explained by normal, though exaggerated, happenings, except for the pillar of fire, which could be considered a metaphor for God's presence. The area is on the north end of the Great Rift Valley which cuts down through Africa, and all could be explained by this being in a state of seismic upheaval. Even the sun standing still could be a misunderstanding. In conclusion then, although the events described were catastrophic there was no evidence that they were other than terrestrial. Later references, however, in the time of Tuthmosis III and the Hittites, to showers of stones, suggested that destructive meteorite falls were common at that period and it is therefore possible that the terrestrial events of the Exodus were triggered by extraterrestrial causes.- Bob Porter considered the archaeological evidence of the Near East. There appeared to be three widespread destruction events during the Bronze Age, the first coinciding with the end of the Egyptian Old Kingdom at around 2300 BC at a time of climatic change. Evidence of new peoples could be taken as invaders or simply people taking advantage of destroyed areas. Deforestation may have helped change the climate. However, it was admitted that no ordinary earthquake could destroy so large an area and therefore something larger needed to be considered. The hiati supposed to be at the end of the Middle Bronze Age, and the second intermediate period in Egypt are a result of a catastrophic mistake in chronology as a result of using Sothic dating. Sites such as Ugarit and Qadesh show little sign of such hiati although there is a destruction at the end of the MB, probably as the result of an earthquake. Although earthquakes today are usually localised, they appear to have been widespread throughout Palestine, Syria and Mesopotamia at this period. A final wave of destruction took place at the end of the Late Bronze Age, associated with famine, war, the Sea Peoples, the end of the Scottish Bronze Age and the rise and fall of the Shang dynasty in China. Twenty narrow tree rings found by Baillie in his samples for this period indicate a long drought, so there was no need to posit a cosmic catastrophe directly. Questions from the floor clearly indicated that many felt that the degree of the destructions could not be explained by natural seismic or climatic events.« Last Edit: Today at 10:01:47 am by Admin »